LDS Church announces new scripture edition

Comments

zoar63,D&C 68:4 is not literal. D&C 137 & 138, the Manifesto
and priesthood revelation all had to be sustained via Common Consent to be
considered scripture. If 68:4 were literal, no sustainings would be needed.

Hugh B. Brown said, "I do not doubt that the brethren have often
spoken under inspiration and given new emphasis-- perhaps even a new explanation
or interpretation--of Church doctrine, but that does not become binding upon the
Church unless and until it is submitted to the scrutiny of the rest of the
brethren and later to the vote of the people."

The Brethren have
repeatedly stated that only the Standard Works are the official source of
official doctrine. Even FAIRLDS agrees. In the Harold B. Lee PH/RS manual, he
clearly states that if anyone, no matter their calling, teaches something
contrary to the standard works, that doctrine is false.

Because the
Proc. advocates the passing of laws based on our subjective morality, it
violates the scriptures when such laws infringe upon existing rights and
liberties (D&C 134:4, 1 Cor. 10:29) as was the case with CA’s Prop. 8.
It'll, therefore, never be sustained.

zoar63Mesa, AZ

March 9, 2013 1:05 p.m.

@lds4gaymarriage

"The Proc wasn't a revelation, but more of
a political position paper written by a committee and finally accepted by GBH on
the 3rd draft, who then presented it to the 12. If was written in response to
the same-sex marriage campaigns in Alaska and Hawaii in 1995. It'll never
be sustained by the membership."

Scripture is not limited to the
standard works you surely must be familiar with this passage in the D&C

And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall
be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord,
shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of
God unto salvation. D&C 68:4

woolybruceIdaho Falls, ID

March 9, 2013 9:09 a.m.

The New Scripture Edition is improving by fixing grammatical problems and
beginning to acknowledge Church History. These are all positive things, but I
don't see how they have anything to do with continuing revelation.

ImABelieverProvo, UT

March 6, 2013 2:52 p.m.

Man is weak and will let little things affect his testimony and lead himself
astray from the truth.

m.g. scottLAYTON, UT

March 6, 2013 11:16 a.m.

Re Sharrona

In your Bible class you use several translations of the
Bible.........\

Now you understand why Joseph Smith was confused?

CarsonzProvo, UT

March 5, 2013 12:35 p.m.

@Dennis No I wasnt expecting you to serve it up on a platter, just provide a
link or something to it so I and others can actually read and find out for
ourselves. As much as I tried I couldnt find it. Again please dont mislead
people with things you dont have any references to where you found it.. Here is
something you can actually read yourself and see that President Gordon B.
Hinckley actually saying and believing that the church does receive continuous
revelation and will always. Go to the church website and in the search bar type,
"continuos revelation Gordon B. Hinckley." Filter it by magazines and it
will be called The Qourom of the First Presidency by Gordon...Also read
article of faith 9 which is doctrines of the church in a nutshell.

LValfreCHICAGO, IL

March 5, 2013 11:57 a.m.

@Dennis

"@Carsonz.....I ignore it because you want everything on
a silver platter. Look it up."

I don't think that the Lord intended for us to
have to read Koine Greek, Aramaic, Hebrew and Latin and translate our own
Bibles. Or to have to have interlinear or side-by-side translations. Or even
to rely on the works of scholars and translators. You say you use "several
modern translations for balance. Do you?" My response is we use several
modern apostles and prophets for truth. Do you?

Who wrote the Bible?
Prophets, Priests and Apostles. There are many, many New Testament
manuscripts. Which is the most authentic? How is the layperson or even for
that matter a scholar to know? How do you tease the correct interpretation out
of another work written 2000 years ago without losing the subtleties and
multiple meanings? The Pharisees lost out on the chance of a lifetime because
they were too busy misinterpreting the scriptures to hear the actual giver of
the law in their midst. A living prophet beats out any written scriptures
because He will speak in the language of today, and will not brook any false
interpretation of man. I bear testimony that Thomas S. Monson is a living,
breathing, teaching prophet of God.

Red Headed StrangerBilly Bobs, TX

March 4, 2013 10:49 p.m.

Sharrona, Part 1

Again, you think you use "facts" to back up
your argument, but your interpretation of the scriptures is highly influenced by
your theology - not the other way around. I see nothing in the three different
versions of the scriptures to contradict Joseph Smith. In fact, if you take a
closer look, I think they help Joseph's position. The verses uses words in
the PAST TENSE "did not keep" "abandoned" "left the place
they belonged". It doesn't sound like any new angels are rebelling,
just the ones in the past. Also, according to LDS Scripture Lucifer staged a
Coup d'etat. Sounds like "leaving" "limits of authority"
to me. Also, in John 9:2 the apostles ask about the male born blind. "Did
he or his parents sin?" How could someone be punished for sin from birth
unless that person first existed before birth?

We use the KJV at
church. I have a NIV on my night stand, and two or three other non-KJV bibles
in my bedroom. When I study the bible I often read on the Bible Gateway
multiple translations on key verses. But what you claim as an advantage of
"balance" is not.

DennisHarwich, MA

March 4, 2013 6:44 p.m.

@Carsonz.....I ignore it because you want everything on a silver platter. Look
it up.

CarsonzProvo, UT

March 4, 2013 1:53 p.m.

@DennisWhy do you continue to ignore the request to provide a reference to
when and where Gordon B. Hinckley said that? Please don't try to miss lead
people with false information.

agkcrbsHolladay, UT

March 4, 2013 5:52 a.m.

So many gnats, so late in the day...

'Principal' can be
first in importance or leadership, besides 'majority'.
'Thresh' and 'thrash' are variants of one word; the adjacent
verses retain their forcefulness. The sons of Mosiah gaining eternal life is
textually ambiguous, though the possible application is still as strong to them
as to those who merely 'believe' them; and coinage does infer pressed
money -- but chapter headings have never been anything but aids or summaries.
Abraham's preface still references the catalytic scrolls, whatever
additional light the Pearl's introductory note casts. The validity of
First Presidency messages doesn't depend upon their canonisation. Saying
'agape is the pure agape of Christ' simply allows that there is an
'agape' which is not pure, or of Christ. Matthew 17 and Mark 9 point
to three (or more) titled 'Elias'. Hebrew and Greek are necessary,
but taking the dead letter, or dead prophets' bones, as a shield against
living oracles is still fatal to faith.

Known historical errors
deserve correcting, but much being discussed here, while interesting,
doesn't matter. Change it, or leave it alone -- it will bring us no closer
to God. Our changing hearts will; loving God and man will.

sharronalayton, UT

March 3, 2013 3:00 p.m.

RE: Twin Lights and Red Headed Stranger, I'm sorry, I have a real time
following your argument.

In our Bible class we use several modern
translations for balance, Do you? The Greek (O.T. and N.T) is handy for serious
Bible study.One of many examples:( Jude 1:6 NIV) And the angels who
did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home…
Fallen angels(devils) Nothing to with Ante-mortal being.

(Jude 1:6
NLT)And I remind you of the angels who did not stay within the limits of
authority God gave them but left the place where they belonged. God has kept
them securely chained in prisons of darkness, waiting for the great day of
judgment.

(Jude 1:6 KJV) And the angels which kept not their
first(*achre, Grk 746) estate, but left their own habitation, he has reserved in
everlasting chains under darkness to the judgment of the great day. See Abr
3:26.

*first place, principality, rule, authority, of Angels ,
Demons.

skepticPhoenix, AZ

March 3, 2013 11:23 a.m.

Dennis, Think about it: everyone posting on this site is a troll. Different ones
may be peering out from opposite sides of the bridge; but each one and all are
trolls. You are in good company, stay with it.

DennisHarwich, MA

March 3, 2013 7:54 a.m.

I don't like being accused of trolling. I'm a 6th generation member,
served a mission and held numerous positions in Ward and Stake levels. I simply
like to state truths that many of you need to examine for yourselves and see
how they fit into the structure of your testimony and understanding of the
Church. Many of you "watch" conference, I listen.

3GrandKeysWalnut Creek, CA

March 3, 2013 1:26 a.m.

Are we still allowed to reference the old chapter headings in Sunday school or
do we have some unlearning to do now?

Red Headed StrangerBilly Bobs, TX

March 2, 2013 10:34 p.m.

Sharrona,

I'm sorry, I have a real time following your
arguments. I think it is because you like to throw up a bunch of
"facts" but the correlation between those facts and what you think they
prove often miss by a mile.

Now you wish to "disprove" Joseph
by a word choice, love or charity. I've tried to follow your reasoning. I
really have. It just doesn't go anywhere. The equivalence written by the
hand of Mormon (not Joseph, I see what you did there) is "charity is the
pure love of Christ" resonates deeply with me. The spirit tells me,
"This is true. You should be doing more of this. Your God loves these
other people just as much as He loves you. Be kind to them. Care for their
well being as much as you care for your own. This is the way that Christ
loved."

You see? Those are the words in Moroni 7 are of a
prophet, written down by a prophet, and translated by another prophet. We can
talk about chiasmus, colophones, Hebraisms, non-Biblical Hebrew and Egyptian
names - yet you strain at the sliver of a definition of two words? Incredible.

Twin LightsLouisville, KY

March 2, 2013 9:58 p.m.

Sharrona,

From Merriam Webster:

Definition of CHARITY

1: benevolent goodwill toward or love of humanity

Origin of
CHARITYMiddle English charite, from Anglo-French charité, from Late
Latin caritat-, caritas Christian love, from Latin, dearness, from carus dear;
akin to Old Irish carae friend, Sanskrit kāma loveFirst Known Use:
13th century

From a Non-LDS Christian site:

While no
English word may contain all of the meaning of the Greek word agape, both
"love" and "charity" can be said to be accurate translations of
the word.

AND

The word "charity" is especially
fitting as a translation of the word agape, because of the close connection
between agape and grace. In fact, the word "charity" actually comes from
the Greek word charis, or grace.

So, it seems that Joseph got it
about right.

sharronalayton, UT

March 2, 2013 7:09 p.m.

RE: Twin Lights, What word should Joseph have used? Modern translation use
Love. Love (agape)the pure love(agape) of Christ. In Greek It makes no
sense. JS misunderstood the KJV. RE: Bill in Nebraska , the Gift of Holy
Ghost. Holy Ghost/Spirit. Same Greek word(pneuma) Poor KJV translation, Modern
translations have Holy Spirit.

snowmanProvo, UT

March 2, 2013 9:30 a.m.

skeptic: Nothing about the scriptures is a lie

BoomerJeffSaint George, UT

March 2, 2013 7:00 a.m.

A few years ago, in a hotel room, i started reading the bible found there, and
for the first time in my life, the bible verses made sense. So I was hoping the
church would use the NEW King James Version, which was the version I had been
reading that night. 400 year old English that we currently have to read is very
hard, and I'm a college graduate.

Twin LightsLouisville, KY

March 2, 2013 12:32 a.m.

Sharrona,

I am unsure as to why you addressed me here as I did not
make that statement.

Reference your oft repeated charity
scripture/translation citation. What word should Joseph have used? What
English word would have better substituted for Love? The more you cite, the
more Mormon’s definition seems to hold true “But charity is the pure
love of Christ, and it endureth forever; and whoso is found possessed of it at
the last day, it shall be well with him.”

.

3GrandKeys

Understood. But the dictionary says what it says.

Bill in NebraskaMaryville, MO

March 1, 2013 8:01 p.m.

lds4gaymarriage: You are wrong that though there are some that say the
Proclamation to the World is a committee writing it really is revelation as it
takes numerous different revelations and scripture putting them to word. If the
First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve decide to put it up for common decent
to be part of the Scriptures then yes it will be accepted, probably by unanimous
vote. Of course you can say you know more than the Prophet but you know very
well that YOU CAN NOT receive revelation for the Church as a whole. To say so
is apostasy it's fullest degree. There is only one person who receives
revelation for the Church and the world as a whole and that man is Thomas S.
Monson. As the world gets closer and closer to the coming of the Lord.
Don't let Satan deceive you into thinking that The Proclamation to the
World isn't a teaching tool of the scriptures because it is very much so.
Disagreeing with them puts one on the wrong side of the Lord.

3GrandKeysWalnut Creek, CA

March 1, 2013 7:01 p.m.

@twin lightsThe definition I'm more familiar with:

ThrashBeat (a person or animal) repeatedly and violently with a stick or
whip.

So for me the use of "thresh" adds the intent of
separation to what God is doing, rather than God just beating down people. As a
missionary I remember myself and others being entrigued by how hard core that
language was. We were the weak things of the Earth being sent forth to thrash
the nations. For me "thresh" softens the tone quite a bit.

CanyontrekerTAYLORSVILLE, UT

March 1, 2013 6:10 p.m.

@sharrona "So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest
of these is love. KJV, NIV, NLT. JS was unaware.Love (agape),
romance(eros) friendship,(Phileo) Philadelphia.There are several Greek words for
love."

That will be a tough change as "Charity never
faileth" is almost an LDS creed. A building block to all success.

You can lose your faith, you can give up hope, but charity never faileth.
Everybody will have lost love. Yet, everyone no matter how dark has the
potential for charity.

Charity builds hope. Hope gives faith. Faith
moves mountains.

sharronalayton, UT

March 1, 2013 5:33 p.m.

Re; Twin Lights Studying and understanding LDS scriptures will be a little
easier now . The LDS church needs a modern translation: In(D&C 110:
1-16) Elias and Elijah appear to JS, but in the Bible they are the same person.
The KJV translators attempted to transliterate Elijah to Elias because there
isn’t a Greek character for the English letter J.To avoid confusion,
modern translations: NIV, NJKV, NASB and the Catholic Bible have Elijah instead
of Elias in(Mt 11:14,; Luke 1:17).

Charity, mid-12c.,"
caritas. Latin, used in KJV instead of the original Greek, agape
"love". Charity is a Latin Vulgate poor KJV translation of love. The
Love chapter, 1 Corinthians 13. Accurate modern translations, Example verse 13
, So now faith, hope, and love abide, these three; but the greatest of these is
love. KJV, NIV, NLT. JS was unaware. Love (agape), romance(eros)
friendship,(Phileo) Philadelphia.There are several Greek words for love.

Re: Malachi, Section 17 is and always has had 9 verses long? Page 81 of
the JST concordance has the blessing of the bread and wine plus more (D&C
17: 22,23)It was edited.

lds4gaymarriageSalt Lake City, UT

March 1, 2013 5:33 p.m.

mhiltonI'm wondering why they does not add the Proclamation of the
family and the Living Christ testimony to the Doctrine and Covenants since they
were making other changes. Interesting though.

LDS4Neither were
added since neither have been sustained via Common Consent by the membership of
the Church as being scripture. The priesthood revelation was as well as other
old revelations (D&C 137 & 138). The Proc wasn't a revelation, but
more of a political position paper written by a committee and finally accepted
by GBH on the 3rd draft, who then presented it to the 12. If was written in
response to the same-sex marriage campaigns in Alaska and Hawaii in 1995.
It'll never be sustained by the membership.

CanyontrekerTAYLORSVILLE, UT

March 1, 2013 5:29 p.m.

It's easier for skeptics to attack the intros, headers, and bible
dictionary than the scripture text itself. I welcome these new editions and
can't wait to get them in Spanish.

OnlytheCrossBakersfield, CA

March 1, 2013 5:29 p.m.

Now if you can just get Hebrew & Greek Interlinears, we can have a
meaningful discussion.

Otherwise, it's Judges 21:25 all over
again, when "In those days there was no king in Israel"... and the
translation table was one big smorgasbord: "And every man did what was
right in his own eyes."

Seriously, get with the academic world
and understand how the Bible came to be.

MalachiRiverton, UT

March 1, 2013 4:24 p.m.

@sharrona,

Section 17 is and always has had 9 verses long. By
"communion, could you be referring to the blessing on the bread and wine in
D&C 20:76-79?

will7370LOGAN, UT

March 1, 2013 4:24 p.m.

Too bad they didn't include The Proclamation on the Family and The Living
Christ when they did this. I would have loved to have had those set in the
scriptures instead of having to constantly keep a worn out xerox copy folded up
inside. Having these two footnoted and cross-referenced with the Topical Guide
would have been a great improvement in the study of these two documents.

DavidDPhoenix, AZ

March 1, 2013 2:52 p.m.

And I don't see any reason to believe the term Lamanite in the Book of
Mormon came to mean everyone who was not a Nephite (the Jew - Gentile analogy).
Didn't it just become a shorthand way of referring to any of the Book of
Mormon peoples who fought against the Nephites, who were idealogically aligned
with the historic Lamanites?

Mark CGilbert, SC

March 1, 2013 2:40 p.m.

@mhilton...Because the Family Proclamation and the Living Christ are not
canonized scripture, although I look for ward to the day when they will be
officially added.

Twin LightsLouisville, KY

March 1, 2013 2:28 p.m.

3 Grand Keys,

From Merriam Webster:

Definition of
THRASHtransitive verb1: to separate the seeds of from the husks and
straw by beating : thresh

AND

intransitive verb1:
thresh

LValfreCHICAGO, IL

March 1, 2013 1:54 p.m.

@Commenter88

"Shows how the scriptures are "living" not
only because they have wide, dynamic, and even unexpected application to
personal lives, but also because our knowledge of context increases over the
years."

Knowledge increases or circumstances for acceptance
change over the years? Be real ..

skepticPhoenix, AZ

March 1, 2013 1:30 p.m.

It has the appearance of the old story of lies and lies to cover up the old
lies.

washcomomBeaverton, OR

March 1, 2013 1:24 p.m.

I hope they just add a few more empty pages at the end, for personal quick
quote/scripture references. I do have a journal that I write in, but some things
I want to keep closer in my scriptures. For me, it's hard to memorize many
passages, so this becomes a valuable tool.

Commenter88Salt Lake City, Utah

March 1, 2013 12:49 p.m.

Shows how the scriptures are "living" not only because they have wide,
dynamic, and even unexpected application to personal lives, but also because our
knowledge of context increases over the years.

3GrandKeysWalnut Creek, CA

March 1, 2013 12:07 p.m.

The intro to the Pearl of Great Price has significant changes:

Paragraph 4, item 2—Changed “A translation from some Egyptian
papyri that came into the hands of Joseph Smith in 1835, containing writings of
the patriarch Abraham” to “An inspired translation of the writings
of Abraham. Joseph Smith began the translation in 1835 after obtaining some
Egyptian papyri.”

Should it now be understood that the
discovery of "some Egyptian papyri" merely coincided with the timing of
Joseph's decision to write an "inspired translation" of the Book of
Abraham rather than Joseph having discovered the actual writings of Abraham on
Egyptian papyri? Anyone else miss the old story?

3GrandKeysWalnut Creek, CA

March 1, 2013 11:43 a.m.

D&C 35:13; 133:59—thrash to thresh"Thrash the nations"
is now "thresh the nations".

I welcome any changes that make
God a little bit nicer.

dhsalumSaint George, UT

March 1, 2013 11:38 a.m.

@KC Mormon,

Dennis originally said that it was said in conference at
the pulpit, so it would be easy to find the quote--if it existed. That is
an interesting quote, however. I think there is a problem in the church of
people arguing semantics over what is 'revelation' versus some other
teaching from a general authority, as if that would have any less authority.

Michael LayneLogan, UT

March 1, 2013 11:31 a.m.

@Dennis, TOO and others who responded to Dennis:

I assume Dennis is
referring to the quote below, which, in fact, indicates that there has been
revelation since Joseph Smith, and very clearly indicates the principle of
continuing revelation. I can't verify the authenticity of the quote, but it
is consistent with other statements church leaders have made which state in no
uncertain terms that continuing revelation is alive and well.

"Let me say first that we have a great body of revelation, the vast
majority of which came from the prophet Joseph Smith. We don't need much
revelation. We need to pay more attention to the revelation we've already
received. Now, if a problem should arise on which we don't have an answer,
we pray about it, we may fast about it, and it comes. Quietly. Usually no voice
of any kind, but just a perception in the mind."They wouldn't let
me post the link, but just google for "Gordon Hinckley revelation".

BevWelGrants Pass, OR

March 1, 2013 11:29 a.m.

Whoa!! No new revelations? What about the revelation on the priesthood? Joseph
F. Smith's wonderful vision in D&C 138? What about the Proclamation on
the Family which I consider revelation? And others. I never heard President
Hinckley say there were no new revelations since Joseph Smith. Where is the
source of that comment? The term "Prophet" indicates continuing
revelation. We have a prophet and so we have continuing revelation!

DavidDPhoenix, AZ

March 1, 2013 11:17 a.m.

KC Mormon, I'm not sure how anyone can presume to know the mind of Joseph
Smith and whether he intended to fine tune the word "Lamanite" in the
D&C to be a "political" term and not a "genalogical" term.
To me, it seems like an unlikely excuse and unnecessary Ark steadying. More
likely, Joseph simply misunderstood the ancestry of native Americans. God told
him a lot of things, but not everything. He likely made an assumption that he
deemed to be reasonable at the time, and that now can be clarified. Period. It
doesn't make him less a prophet of God.

Bruce T. ForbesKearns, UT

March 1, 2013 11:09 a.m.

How exciting! And in time for my birthday! the fact that the historical
information is being upgraded to conform to reflect the recent research means
there's going to be plenty to learn!

Tom in CAVallejo, CA

March 1, 2013 11:07 a.m.

"Why would you use the word "continuing"? ...... "

Dennis - with her comment, I'm sure Kelly didn't intend to argue
with people like you.

KC MormonEdgerton, KS

March 1, 2013 10:55 a.m.

dhsalum,I have not been able to find one but I have been able fo find
anto-mormon sites that quote him saying the opposite, like this from
mormonthinkDR: You receive?Gordon B. Hinckley: Now we
don’t need a lot of continuing revelation. We have a great, basic
reservoir of revelation. But if a problem arises, as it does occasionally, a
vexatious thing with which we have to deal, we go to the Lord in prayer. We
discuss it as a First Presidency and as a Council of the Twelve Apostles. We
pray about it and then comes the whisperings of a still small voice. And we
know the direction we should take and we proceed accordingly.DR: And
this is a revelation?Gordon B. Hinckley: This is a revelation.DR:
How often have you received such revelations?Gordon B. Hinckly: Oh,
I don’t know. I feel satisfied that in some circumstances we’ve had
such revelation. It’s a very sacred thing that we don’t like to
talk about a lot. A very sacred thing.”

@Max:"It used to say that the Lamanites are the 'principal
ancestors of the American Indians.'

The Book of Mormon people
lived almost exclusively in the area where the Hill Cumorah is located.
That's the only place you find the proper DNA evidence. The South and
Central American 'Indians' (and perhaps the USA West Coast Indians)
have Asian DNA. For sure the Aleuts in Alaska are from Asia perhaps crossing
the Bering Straight land bridge. Furthermore, Cumorah is where the golden
plates were found and the 'final battle' took place.

There's nothing in the Book that indicates anything but short distances
between cities. There's no evidence of having RR's and jets.
Certainly, some of the people could have migrated and are not covered in the
Book. Lewis and Clark took off from St. Lewis and went all the way to the
Pacific Coast in just a few short months walking and paddling canoes. Why
couldn't BofM people do the same and populate much of America? We
don't know. But we are fairly sure Hagar didn't sail to Hawaii.

dhsalumSaint George, UT

March 1, 2013 10:30 a.m.

@Dennis,

We need a quote.

Spider RicoGreeley, CO

March 1, 2013 10:26 a.m.

Ignore Dennis and his trolling - the bretheren have never stopped talking about
continuing revelation

MaxCharlotte, NC

March 1, 2013 10:20 a.m.

KC Mormon,

Your response to David D is a beautiful explanation. I
don't think that most LDS understand this. Thanks and well done.

DennisHarwich, MA

March 1, 2013 10:18 a.m.

@ TOO

According to President Hinkley we have not had revelation.
All the projects you have mentioned apparently were just good ideas from the
brethren.

KC MormonEdgerton, KS

March 1, 2013 10:07 a.m.

DavidD,The term Lamanite in the Book of Mormon is not a genealogy term but
a political term. It is used the same way that the terms Jew and Gentile are
used. Jew is anyone that is of the house of Israel broken away or not and
Gentile is anyone else. Nephite is anyone who is living among the people that
followed Nephi after their separation or follows their religion and Lamanite is
anyone else. This can be seen by the fact that people constantly move from one
group to the other. In one chapter they are Nephites, in the next they are
Lamanites then several chapters later they are back to being Nephites.
Furthermore Joseph Smith spoke of his belife that people came to the Americas at
the time of Moses. These people are clearly not mentioned in the Book of Mormon.
With all this then the term Lamanite to Joseph Smith was simply anyone in the
Americas before Columbus that was not a Nephite. As the Nephite nation was
destroyed clearly all that was left would have been? Lamanites because the term
in genealogical but geopolitical.

Utes FanSalt Lake City, UT

March 1, 2013 10:06 a.m.

The chapter heading to Alma 11 has been changed. It used to mention "Nephite
coins and measures" but now just says the following:

"The
Nephite monetary system is set forth"

Glad to see the change. The
text in that chapter does not mention coins, but measures only. The new heading
is correct.

NeanderthalPheonix, AZ

March 1, 2013 10:05 a.m.

The revisions were released late Thursday (included) the Pearl of Great
Price..."

We hope this volume has been updated to clarify the
source... which research shows was not the purported ancient scrolls.

IrrelevantProvo, UT

March 1, 2013 10:01 a.m.

@Dennis

Do you mind giving reference to your Gordon B. Hinckley
quote? i'm interested in which context he was speaking.

What
trememdous news for the church! a testimony for the true gospel

KC MormonEdgerton, KS

March 1, 2013 9:55 a.m.

Gregg WeberOne problem I have found with many of the newer versions of the
Bible is that in trying to use more modern terms they lose many of the hidden
double meanings placed in the Bible. Another is that they are first
interpretations and then translations to meet that interpretation. Lets take for
example John 4:9 in the KJV it reads only begotten son this can be read as only
begotten in the flesh yet we are all his sons and daughters in spirit. However
in the new translations they have taken that possibility completely out
interpreting it first, eliminating that we are spiritual children of God then
translating it to one and only son. Now there is no room for our being spirit
children of our God. While some say the LDS interpretation is wrong to remove
the possibility by interpreting and then translating is telling God you must
mean this. So they are telling God what he can mean and not listening to God.

dhsalumSaint George, UT

March 1, 2013 9:43 a.m.

@Gregg Weber,

In my experience, almost every other version of the
Bible has been 'dumbed down' to modern english and loses much of the
symoblism--especially in the New Testament. I am by no means a scriptorian, but
I believe the KJV is still the most appropriate version.

suzyk#1Mount Pleasant, UT

March 1, 2013 9:44 a.m.

The First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
continues to receive revelation from the Lord. That's what is wonderful
about our Church is the inspiration and revelations that are received through
our wonderful and loving Prophets.

CanadaGreywolfcanada, 00

March 1, 2013 9:40 a.m.

no new revelation since joseph Smith ???????????How about 1975 spencer w
kimball ? priesthood and blacks , was that not revelation ????? IT SURE WAS
!!!!!

MaxCharlotte, NC

March 1, 2013 9:31 a.m.

David D,

It is true that many have just assumed that the American
Indians were the Lamanites. The fact remains, however, that there is nothing in
the Book of Mormon that says that the Lamanites are the principal ancestors.
Certainly, they are AMONG the ancestors but saying that they are the principal
ancestors is an over statement that needed to be modified.

MrsHAltamont, UT

March 1, 2013 9:25 a.m.

Dennis and TOO:I am also curious as to the whole "Nor new
revelation" quote. I do not recall any prophet ever saying that. I believe
we have received many new revelations. "We believe...God will yet
reveal many great and important things pertaining..."

Gregg WeberSEATTLE, WA

March 1, 2013 9:13 a.m.

If I remember right (although I wasn't there) Joseph Smith said that the
KJV was the best. But there have been others produced since then. Is it still
the best or just the "standard"?Are there other versions that are
more accurate for study, with paragraphs and verse divisions that don't
divide sentences and thoughts, or even using Sentence Diagrams to make sure
everyone knows what the meaning is?If not, can one be produced? I'm
writing mainly about the Bible.

KC MormonEdgerton, KS

March 1, 2013 8:40 a.m.

Whoa Nellie,Lets see every splinter group of the LDS church has a version
of the Book Of Mormon while the text. While the base text is from the original
1830 edition and the changes Joseph Smith made in his life each group has their
own version of it. The same goes with the Doctrine and Covenants, try comparing
the Community of Christ (formerly RLDS) Doctrine and Covenants with the LDS. As
for the LDS version of the Bible while the text is the King James the foot
notes, chapter headings, topical guide, and bible dictionary are part of the
bible version used by the LDS church. Because you will not find any other church
using that same version of the KJV it does make it a distinct version of the
KJV. So the term LDS version is completely accurate.

DavidDPhoenix, AZ

March 1, 2013 8:38 a.m.

Max,

I'm not sure the change is all that insignificant. Several
times in the D&C, Joseph Smith referred to native Americans as
"Lamanites." There seems to be good reason to assume that he thought
that Lamanites were not only the principal ancestors of native Americans, but
the sole ancestors. So, I'm not so sure it is merely a correction of a
recent misunderstanding.

TOOSanpete, UT

March 1, 2013 8:18 a.m.

Dennis,

Just curious, when did he say that? Because since Joseph
Smith, we've had

1. A few sections added to the Doctrine and
Covenants2. All worthy males able to receive the Priesthood.3.
Numerous temples4. Countless new General Authorities and local leaders

There are many more examples, but these just come to mind instantly.
I'm not arguing, I've just never heard that quote/don't remember.
Could you let me know?

RGBuena Vista, VA

March 1, 2013 8:12 a.m.

The one that has bothered me was the old heading to Mosiah 28. In verse 7, God
says about Mosiah’s sons’ desire to serve a mission, “Let them
go up, for many will believe on their words, and they shall have eternal
life.” The old heading said that Mosiah’s sons would have eternal
life, but I always thought the scripture meant that their converts would have
eternal life. My thinking is reinforced by Mosiah 29:9, where Mosiah admits to
the possibility at least one of his sons might “turn again to his
pride.” He might not have worried about this possibility if he thought his
son had been promised eternal life. I once wrote to the GAs about this and was
told it would be changed. Now it has been. The other heading I knew would be
changed is the header to Alma 11: “Nephite coinage is set forth”
changed to “Nephite monetary system is set forth.” This is because
we don’t know if the Nephites pressed their gold and silver into coins.

sharronalayton, UT

March 1, 2013 8:07 a.m.

RE; Thunder, If you review the detailed list of changes made, actual scripture
verse changes in all four books (KJV, BoM, D&C, PGP) were made. The changes
weren't limited to headings and footnotes.(D&C 17:22,23)The
communion service the blessing of the bread and wine are msissing.

Re: Encyclopedia of Mormonism Encyclopedia he word "paradise" is not
found in the Old Testamen. wrong,The word "paradise" is found
several times in the O.T. . The LORD(YHWH) God planted a garden(paradeisos, G#
3857) eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.(Gen 2:8
Septuagint). The LORD(YHWH) … Garden(paradeisos of Eden …( Gen2:15
Septuagint) ….And they heard the voice of the LORD(YHWH) God walking in
the garden (paradeisos,)n in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid
themselves from the presence of the LORD(YHWH) God amongst the trees of the
garden.(Gen 3:8).

MaxCharlotte, NC

March 1, 2013 8:03 a.m.

@ The Otter

I agree that some have made a mountain out of a molehill
over this (and this is why I prefaced my comment by saying it is a rather
insignificant correction)but it is always best to be precise. The correction was
a good one.

JWBKaysville, UT

March 1, 2013 7:53 a.m.

This is almost as exciting as in 1979 when the Scriptures and Topical Guide were
integrated and provided an extremely valuable tool for anyone attempting to feel
the Spirit in their personal and family situations.

With all the
various forms of media and easy access from LDS.ORG and other sources, what a
blessing this will be in the lives of leaders, teachers, missionaries and people
who are searching the web for life's simple questions of: Why we are here?
Where did we come from? and Where are we going?

The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-day Saints has a living Prophet and Apostles to lead us through
this portion of our journey. Thanks to God for prophets today as He has not
left us alone in a world of strife and woe. There is a plan and this is one of
the ways to find out what the plan is to guide us through these latter-days.

Thanks to Deseret News for publishing this article and the Good News
that comes through the scriptures to all who will read and feel the Spirit.

theOtterLafayette, IN

March 1, 2013 7:52 a.m.

Max,

While you are correct that “the Book of Mormon… used
to say that the Lamanites are the ‘principal ancestors of the American
Indians’” and that the phrase now “states that the Lamanites
are ‘among the ancestors of the American Indians,’” I think
people are making a mountain out of a molehill on that one. Given the context,
the old statement was 100% accurate. The problem is that many people erroneously
equate the word “principal” with the words
“primary” and/or “majority,” an interpretation that is
obviously not supported by the text itself.

Regardless, great to hear
that they’re finally updating it. I hope this means we’ll finally
see the *Guide to the Scriptures* in print! (I’ve always loved that, in
the Castilian version.)

ThunderOrem, UT

March 1, 2013 7:53 a.m.

@Whoa Nellie - The formatting of the editions of these books as well as the
unique additions (cross-references to the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and
Covenants, and Pearl of Great Price) make the term "LDS version"
appropriate for the KJV. The Community of Christ (former RLDS) church also has
their own editions of some of these books, also making the term "LDS
version" appropriate. Doubleday released a version of the Book of Mormon
nearly a decade ago in 2004, also making the term "LDS version"
appropriate. If you review the detailed list of changes made, actual scripture
verse changes in all four books (KJV, BoM, D&C, PGP) were made. The changes
weren't limited to headings and footnotes.

mhiltonLancaster, CA

March 1, 2013 7:41 a.m.

I'm wondering why they does not add the Proclamation of the family and the
Living Christ testimony to the Doctrine and Covenants since they were making
other changes. Interesting though.

Whoa NellieAmerican Fork, UT

March 1, 2013 7:39 a.m.

"The revisions were released late Thursday and have been integrated with the
LDS versions of the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants
and the Pearl of Great Price. . ."The LDS versions of the Book of
Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and the P of GP? Who else has a version of these
books? Actually the so-called LDS version of the Bible is simply the King James
version. Why did the author of this article feel the need to include the word
'version'? Perhaps the new additions to chapter headings and footnotes
could have been better described so as not to imply that the actual scriptures
had changes.

ShushannahKendal, Cumbria

March 1, 2013 7:39 a.m.

great news, but I am curious... will this include corrections in the Topical
Guide? I have met with many errors during my study of this great tool...

MaxCharlotte, NC

March 1, 2013 6:30 a.m.

A rather insignificant correction but one I am glad to see is in the
introduction of the Book of Mormon. It used to say that the Lamanites are the
"principal ancestors of the American Indians." This was added in the
previous edition. This statement never appeared in older editions.

There is absolutely nothing in the actual text of the Book of Mormon to
suggest that the only people living on the American continent were Nephites and
Lamanites. The Book of Mormon talks about other groups that came to this
continent and strongly implies that there were still other people that they
interacted with (the unbelievers who would come and try to convince the people
away from their religion, for example).

It is unfortunate that after
150 years or so that the "principal ancestor" comment suddenly appeared.
The new edition more correctly states that the Lamanites are "among the
ancestors of the American Indians."

nathan000000Yuma, AZ

March 1, 2013 6:02 a.m.

Yes, it'll be fun to see how this contributes to gospel scholarship. I
wonder if some day they'll redo the layout, too. That is, instead of
breaking lines at every verse, they'll have multiple verses per paragraph,
with headings and subheadings. That's how the Structured Edition of the
Doctrine and Covenants is laid out.

DennisHarwich, MA

March 1, 2013 5:36 a.m.

"For a church that believes in continuing revelation,"@
KellyWSmith....It's interesting that you would say this. Gordon B. Hinkley
speaking from the pulpit at conference said there has NOT been additional
revelation since God spoke to Joseph Smith. Why would you use the word
"continuing"?

DRayRoy, UT

March 1, 2013 12:24 a.m.

Corrections are not of Doctrine, not of Covenants, or of meaning; we may be
eager to obtain all improvements we can, but must not let these things be of
primary focus...it's the spirit, not the letter of things that brings the
life & purpose into play.

KellyWSmithSparks, NV

Feb. 28, 2013 11:49 p.m.

For a church that believes in continuing revelation, they also believe in making
things better. They upgrade and renovate Temples; they built the Conference
Center when they already had the Tabernacle; they continue to spread the gospel
all over the world in every way possible; they create the most amazing website
in the whole world to freely share its message; they produce fantastic videos on
the New Testament and give them away to the world; they create new teaching
programs to take advantage of online capabilities, etc. etc. etc.

This is a testimony to me that the leadership of the LDS Church is always
trying to make things better and that shows great inspiration. I have already
downloaded the new set to my phone and tablet tonight and I look forward to
reading them tomorrow.

nathan000000Yuma, AZ

Feb. 28, 2013 11:22 p.m.

This is tremendous! I can't wait until they add the changes beyond section
88 of the D&C. And it’s so nice that they’ve published the
side-by-side comparison, obviating the task of chasing them down one-by-one.
They must have known thousands would want to do just that, and they were kind
enough to do it for us. :-)